Judgment : (V.M. Kanade J.) 1. The Original Accused No.2 has filed Criminal Appeal No. 247 of 2006 and Original Accused Nos.3 and 4 have filed Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2006 against the Judgment and Order passed by the Trial Court, convicting the Accused Nos.2 to 4 for the offence punishable under section 307 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also for the offence punishable under section 324 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code. By the said judgment and order, the Accused Nos.2 to 4 were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under section 307 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and were also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years each for the offence punishable under section 324 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code and also imposed fine of Rs.5,000/- each and, in default, directed that they should suffer further imprisonment for six months. 2. Brief facts are as under: The prosecution case is that on 10th June, 2004 at about 17.30 to 17.45 hours one Papa @ Farid and his friend Makdiya and two persons pushed one Mohammed Salim (appeal 247 of 2006 a/w appeal 8 of 2006) Amin Kureshi and abused him because according to them they were police informers and at that time, according to the prosecution, Papa @ Farid and Makdiya assaulted Mohammed Salim Amit Kureshi on the right side of his chest with knife and Makdiya also assaulted him over the chest and two other persons, who were friends of the accused, also assaulted the said Mohammed Salim Amin Kureshi. 3. An FIR was lodged by Ashfaq Shaikh against Papa @ Farid and Makdiya and two other persons. On the basis of the complaint, the accused were arrested and the statements of witnesses were recorded and thereafter, a chargesheet was filed and the matter was committed to the Court of Sessions. A charge was framed against the Accused Nos.2 to 4 and the trial against the Accused No.1 was separated since he was absconding. On the basis of the complaint, the accused were arrested and the statements of witnesses were recorded and thereafter, a chargesheet was filed and the matter was committed to the Court of Sessions. A charge was framed against the Accused Nos.2 to 4 and the trial against the Accused No.1 was separated since he was absconding. The Trial Court on the basis of the evidence adduced by the prosecution convicted all the accused for the offence punishable under section 307 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for life imprisonment and also convicted the accused for the offence punishable under section 324 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer R.I for three years each and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each and, in default, to suffer further R.I. for six months. 4. The Accused No.2 has filed Criminal Appeal No. 247 of (appeal 247 of 2006 a/w appeal 8 of 2006) 2006 and Accused Nos.3 and 4 has filed Criminal Appeal No.8 of 2006. 5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant -Accused No.2 in Appeal No. 247 of 2006 submitted that he does not wish to challenge the conviction of the Accused No.2 for the offence punishable under section 307 and section 324 of the Indian Penal Code on merits. He submitted that he was only challenging the sentence awarded by the Trial Court to the Accused No.2. He submitted that no case was made out for giving life imprisonment to the Accused No.2 for the offence punishable under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. He invited our attention to the statement of the injured PW-1. He submitted that the other eye witnesses have turned hostile. It was submitted that this was not the case where the accused could have been sentenced to suffer R.I. for life. 6. The learned APP for the State, on the other hand, submitted that the PW-1 had received nine injuries and if timely medical treatment was not given to him, he would have died and, therefore, the Trial Court was justified in awarding life imprisonment to all the accused. 7. We have perused the judgment and order of the Trial Court and also the evidence of PW-1, who is the eye witness (appeal 247 of 2006 a/w appeal 8 of 2006) and the other witnesses. 7. We have perused the judgment and order of the Trial Court and also the evidence of PW-1, who is the eye witness (appeal 247 of 2006 a/w appeal 8 of 2006) and the other witnesses. In our view, there was no reasons have been assigned by the Trial Court why the Appellant in this case viz. Accused No.2 should be awarded maximum sentenced of R.I. for life. The sentence awarded by the Trial Court, therefore, in our view is excessive. 8. The Appellant- Accused No.2 is in jail since last seven years and taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in our view, it would be appropriate if the sentence of life imprisonment is reduced to sentence with which the Accused No.2 has already undergone. The Appeal No.247 of 2006 filed by the Original Accused No.2 is, accordingly, partly allowed. The conviction of the Appellant/Original Accused No.2 is confirmed so far as the offence punishable under section 307 r/w. 34 is concerned. However, the sentence is reduced to sentence with which the Appellant is already undergone. The sentence, so far as the offence punishable under section 324 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, however, is confirmed. Criminal Appeal No. 247 of 2006 is, partly allowed and accordingly disposed of. The bail application filed by the Appellant does not survive and is also disposed of. 9. We have appointed Shri Arfan Sait as an Amicus Curiae to appear on behalf of the Accused Nos.3 and 4 in Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2006 to assist this Court. It is an admitted (appeal 247 of 2006 a/w appeal 8 of 2006) position that the Original Accused Nos.3 and 4 have not been named in the FIR. It is also an admitted position that the PW-1 did not identify the Accused Nos.3 and 4 before the Court and also did not attribute any role to them. No tests identification parade was held by the Investigating Officer. Apart from that, the Complainant and the other eye witnesses turned hostile and they did not support the case of the prosecution. The Trial Court has acquitted the Appellants for the offences punishable under section 4 r/w 27 of the Indian Arms Act and recovery also has not been established. 10. Apart from that, the Complainant and the other eye witnesses turned hostile and they did not support the case of the prosecution. The Trial Court has acquitted the Appellants for the offences punishable under section 4 r/w 27 of the Indian Arms Act and recovery also has not been established. 10. This being the position, there is absolutely no material whatsoever on record to convict the Original Accused Nos.3 and 4 for the said alleged offence punishable under section 307 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 324 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellants, therefore, are entitled to be acquitted for the said offence with which they have charged. Criminal Appeal No.8 of 2006 is, therefore, allowed. The Appellants in the said appeal are acquitted of the offence with which they were charged. The judgment and order passed by the Trial Court is quashed and set aside. The Appellants are on bail, their bail bonds are cancelled.